On the go and no time to finish that story right now? Your News is the place for you to save content to read later from any device. Register with us and content you save will appear here so you can access them to read later.

Consumer electronics giant Apple paid no income tax to Inland Revenue over the past decade despite selling billions of dollars worth of iPhones and iPads to New Zealanders.

The revelations about Apple's local tax bill - in addition to international concerns about its use of havens such as Ireland - have sparked concerns a recently announced government crackdown on multinational tax avoidance may not go far enough.

Green Party co-leader James Shaw said Apple was not paying its fair share.

"It is absolutely extraordinary that they are able to get away with paying zero tax in this country. I really like Apple products - they're incredibly innovative - but it looks like their tax department is even more innovative than their product designers," Shaw said.

New Zealanders are avid Apple consumers - especially of its high-end iPhone handsets - and the company accounted for a quarter of the local smartphone market last year. According to figures compiled by industry analysts IDC, Apple sold 221,000 phones here in the three months to December.

Over the past decade, mostly thanks to the iPhone revolutionising the mobile phone, Apple grew to become the world's largest and most profitable company. According to financial statements for the company's local subsidiary, Apple Sales New Zealand, total sales here since 2007 amount to $4.2 billion.

The accounts also show apparent income tax payments of $34 million - but a close reading shows this sum was actually sent abroad to the Australian Tax Office, an arrangement that has been in place since at least 2007.

Had Apple reported the same healthy profit margin in New Zealand as it did for its operations globally it would have paid $356m in taxes over the period.

In a statement issued from Australia, the multinational technology giant stressed it followed the law but did not directly address questions about the structuring of its New Zealand operations and the apparent lack of payments to Inland Revenue.

"Apple aims to be a force for good and we're proud of the contributions we've made in New Zealand over the past decade. Because our products and services are created, designed and engineered in the US, that's where the vast majority of our tax is paid," the spokesperson said.

Apple's New Zealand operations are wholly owned by an Australian parent and appear to be run from there. A tax treaty between the two countries sees dual claims on income tax default to where the company is controlled.

In a written statement, Collins said a "minority" of international companies were exploiting rules to avoiding paying tax and "we do not consider the amount of tax paid by these multinationals is fair".

Earlier this month Collins released a package of tax reforms aimed at tackling the issue - first thrust on to the public agenda last year with the Herald's Tax Gap series - but it is not clear whether the measures will have any effect on Apple.

"The new measures proposed earlier this month will help ensure that multinationals with a large internet footprint will be taxable on the profits from their New Zealand sales when they have people working for them in New Zealand," Collins said.

According to LinkedIn, Apple has several dozen employees based in New Zealand.

Shaw and Russell both expressed broad support for the Collins package but urged the consultation period - open until April 7 - not be used to water down the proposals.

Littlewood said any public outrage over the fact that the most profitable company in the world paid zero tax in New Zealand would be perfectly understandable but not easily defused. "It is really is about as simple as that.

"Whether something can be done about it is another question. The United Kingdom and Australia are taking a lead on this and it will be interesting to see how it works out for them."

Both Australia and Britain have gone further than the New Zealand Government and impose a diverted profits tax on companies trying to unfairly skirt national tax obligations.

John Payne, spokesman for the big business umbrella outfit the Corporate Taxpayers Group, cautioned against radical changes to the tax regime and warned the mechanism used by Apple was also used by local exporters.

"It's Tax 101 in terms of activity ... and it's quid pro quo for us when we're operating similarly in another country," Payne said.

Controversy over Apple's tax affairs has been raging for years internationally.

The Australian Financial Review reported in 2014 on Apple's use of Irish subsidiaries to shift billions of profits out of Australasia.

And last year the European Union took a dim view of Apple's Irish operations, punishing the company with a record $20b tax bill after concluding that it had used the territory to improperly pay a tax rate of just 2 per cent on its international earnings.